Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident criticizes invocation practice, raises questions about elections support and LGBTQ services during public comment

5529040 · August 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A public commenter at the Aug. 4 Onslow County commissioners meeting criticized the invocation practice and asked whether the Board of Elections has sufficient funding and whether the county supports LGBTQIA+ services and safe spaces.

Ari Rakowitz used the public-comment period at the Aug. 4 Onslow County Board of Commissioners meeting to criticize the invocation and to ask a series of questions about election funding and county support for LGBTQIA+ residents and non-Christian faiths.

Rakowitz said the board’s repeated prayers risk privileging one religion and urged commissioners to pursue “unity, sustainability, kindness, inclusion, equity, empathy, diversity, critical thinking, and compersion.” He asked whether the board of elections will receive the funding and permission to hire additional staff and resources needed “to conduct the closest thing possible to a safe, free, and fair election” under state and federal guidelines. He also asked what measurable county-supported activities — for example, drag shows or pride festivals — exist to support the LGBTQIA+ community and whether there are government-supported safe spaces where LGBTQIA+ residents and people of non‑Christian faiths can access services without being proselytized.

“By refusing to acknowledge that we exist or to treat our existence as less valuable than yours, you choose the wrong side of history,” Rakowitz said. He asked the board for answers to six questions but the public‑comment time limit ended before he could finish; the board’s rules of procedure reserve responses for the commissioner comments portion of the meeting.

The transcript records no verbal response to Rakowitz during the public‑comment period. Commissioners later noted the board would schedule a workshop for the Board of Elections to present requests and needs; the transcript contains additional comments from commissioners during the commissioner-comment period but no direct, contemporaneous answers to all of Rakowitz’s questions.